Ranking Law Schools with LSATs, Employment Outcomes, and Law Review Citations

Ranking Law Schools with LSATs, Employment Outcomes, and Law Review Citations ALFRED L. BROPHY * This Article offers an alternative to the much-discussed U.S. News & World Report ings. Where U.S. News ings are affected by a wide variety of factors some of which are criticized as irrelevant to what prospective students care about or should care about this Article looks to three variables: the median LSAT score of entering students, which seeks to capture the quality of the student body; the percentage of the graduating students who are employed at nine months following graduation at full-time, permanent, JD-required jobs (a separate analysis excludes school-funded positions and solo practitioners from this variable); and the number of citations to each school s main law review, which seeks to capture a school s recent reputation. It -orders each of those variables, averages those s to obtain a new ing, and then compares those new ings to those of the 147 schools analyzed in U.S. News & World Report in March 2014. It identifies the schools that improve and decline the most with the new ing. This Article provides s for all 194 American Bar Association accredited law schools that U.S. News included in its ings released in 2014, including the forty-seven schools that U.S. News put in its uned category. INTRODUCTION The economic downturn and long-term changes in the market for and delivery of legal services have occurred at a time when law schools, the students they serve, and the bar are rethinking a great many things. Prospective students are increasingly focused on employment prospects. Similarly, students, faculty, and administrators are all focusing attention on affordability of legal education and many are questioning the value of law school in relation to other career options. Moreover, as the job crisis has become worse for entry-level lawyers, 1 students want competitive edges whenever possible, including attending highly ed law schools. The way that law schools are evaluated and the costs associated with law school 2 are being rethought. * Judge John J. Parker Distinguished Professor of Law, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. Contact the author at abrophy@email.unc.edu or 919.962.4128. I would like to thank Bernard A. Burk, Jack Chin, John Coyle, Daniel M. Filler, Natalie Kitroeff, Kyle McEntee, Richard E. Myers, Gregg Polsky, Dana A. Remus, and Robert J. Smith for help. 1 See David Groshoff, Creatively Financed Legal Education in a Marketized Environment: How Faculty Leveraged Buyouts Can Maximize Law Schools' Stakeholder Values, 17 FORDHAM J. CORP. & FIN. L. 387 (2012); Lucille A. Jewel, I Can Has Lawyer? The Conflict Between the Participatory Culture of the Internet and the Legal Profession, 33 HASTINGS COMM. & ENT L.J. 341 (2011); Lucille A. Jewel, You're Doing it Wrong: How the Anti-law School Scam Blogging Movement Can Shape the Legal Profession, 12 MINN. J.L. SCI. & TECH. 239 (2011); Kyle P. McEntee & Patrick J. Lynch, A Way Forward: Transparency at American Law Schools, 32 PACE L. REV. 1 (2012); Joel F. Murray, Professional Dishonesty: Do U.S. Law Schools That Report False or Misleading Employment Statistics Violate Consumer Protection Laws?, 15 J. CONSUMER & COM. L. 97 (2012). 2 David C. Yamada, Therapeutic Jurisprudence and the Practice of Legal Scholarship, 41 U. MEM. L. REV. 121 (2010).

56 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 The U.S. News & World Report ings rely on a number of variables. U.S. News weights peer and lawyer/judge assessment especially heavily. Additionally, it also includes student quality as measured by LSAT scores of entering students; student selectivity as measured by percentage of applicants accepted; spending per pupil; bar pass rate; and job outcome data. 3 Moreover, in response to the increasingly detailed job data that the ABA is collecting, U.S. News includes employment outcomes. 4 While U.S. News ings include a lot of variables, there is reason to focus intense attention on student quality and student outcome. The quality of student is an important factor and of concern to students because so much of the law school experience relates to interactions that students have with each other. This Article uses the median LSAT scores of students entering in fall 2013, as reported by schools to the ABA, as its measure of student quality. The median LSAT tells about the revealed preferences of applicants; it also tells a great deal about the quality of the educational experience. Employment outcome is of primary concern to prospective students and should be central to the choice of a law school. There is extensive literature on how to measure student outcomes; 5 some of the questions relate to whether it is appropriate to include school-funded jobs and whether to include so-called JDadvantaged jobs. In its initial analysis this Article uses the percentage of the class of 2013 employed in full-time, permanent, bar passage required (here referred to as JD-required) jobs at nine months after graduation. This includes those who are in school-funded positions and excludes the JD-advantaged positions. The rationale is that the JD-required jobs are those most prospective students would want. The intitial analysis in this Article (provided in tables 1 and 4) includes school-funded positions on the principle that school-funded positions may help students to transition to desirable jobs and, thus, schools should be rewarded for providing these positions. Nevertheless, there is a good rationale for excluding those positions, because they may not reflect the kinds of desirable jobs that are on par with full-time, JD-required jobs with law firms and government employers. Therefore, this Article subsequently excludes the school-funded positions and solo practitioners, re-s schools based on that modified employment, and compares school s on those two different employment measures in table 11. For most schools there is little change; for a small number of schools that have employed a significant percentage of their graduates, the s are noticeably lower 3 Sam Flanigan & Robert Morse, Methodology: 2016 Best Law Schools Rankings, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REP., (March 9, 2015), http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduateschools/articles/law-schools-methodology. 4 Bob Morse, Recent Law School News Focuses on Rankings, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REP., (JULY 5, 2012, 9:30 AM), http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-ingsblog/2012/07/05/recent-law-school-news-focuses-on-ings. U.S. News weights graduates employed at graduation.04 and employed at nine months.14, but it is unclear how it measures placement success. See Flanigan & Morse, supra note 3. They report only that placement success was calculated by assigning various weights to the number of grads employed in 43 of these different types of post-j.d. jobs, employment statuses, and durations. Id. 5 See, e.g., Bernard A. Burk, What's New About the New Normal: The Evolving Market for New Lawyers in the 21st Century, 41 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 541 608 (2014) (discussing measures of employment outcomes, including JD-advantaged positions).

2015] Ranking Law Schools 57 using that modified employment measure. 6 The third and final variable used in this Article is citations to a law school s main law review from 2006 to 2013. This is designed to tell something about the intellectual orientation and culture of the school and to reveal something about the school s standing in the legal education community. 7 U.S. News heavily weights reputation of law schools among other law faculty and among judges and lawyers. 8 In place of those notoriously static and proprietary variables, this Article turns to citations to each school s main law review as a proxy for academic reputation. Previous research has shown that there is a high correlation between the U.S. News peer assessment scores and citations to schools main law reviews. While some will criticize the inclusion of the scholarly output of a law school as a significant factor in ing, citations offer one gauge that reflects the academic productivity and aspirations of a school. Moreover, that is not as proprietary as U.S. News peer and lawyer/judge assessment scores are, and citations are also not as susceptible to manipulation. Citations, moreover, are one popular tool for ings often, as in the work of Brian Leiter 9 and Greg Sisk, 10 the citations are to the work of law faculty members. 11 This Article focuses on citations to recent issues of schools main law reviews as a measure of school quality, which some scholars have also considered in the past as part of a ings scheme. 12 6 For example, Law School Transparency s website provides extended discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of various measures of outcome. Methodology, LAW SCHOOL TRANSPARENCY (April 3, 2013), http://www.lstscorereports.com/guides/methodology/. Law School Transparency s employment score measure is similar to one employed here, except that it excludes solo practitioners. Id. Law School Transparency also has a separate underemployment measure. Id. 7 See Alfred L. Brophy, The Emerging Importance of Law Review Rankings for Law School Rankings, 2003-2007, 78 U. COLO. L. REV. 35 (2007). 8 U.S. News weights peer assessment as 25% of its ing and lawyer/judge assessment as 15%, for a total of 40% for what it calls the quality assessment scores. Flanigan & Morse, supra note 3. 9 See Brian Leiter, How to Rank Law Schools, 81 IND. L.J. 47 (2006); Top 25 Law Faculties in Scholarly Impact, 2005 2009 (And Highest Impact Faculty in 13 Areas of Specialization), BRIAN LEITER S LAW SCHOOL RANKINGS, http://www.leiterings.com/new/2010_scholarlyimpact.shtml. 10 See Gregory Sisk, Valerie Aggerbeck, Debby Hackerson & Mary Wells, Scholarly Impact of Law School Faculties in 2012: Applying Leiter Scores to Rank the Top Third, 9 U. ST. THOMAS L.J. 838 (2012); GREGORY SISK, DEBBY HACKERSON, Mary Wells & Valerie Aggerbeck, Scholarly Impact of Law School Faculties: Extending the Leiter Rankings to the Top 70 (Univ. of St. Thomas Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-24, 2010), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1674764. 11 Theodore Eisenberg & Martin T. Wells, Ranking and Explaining the Scholarly Impact of Law Schools, 27 J. LEGAL STUD. 373 (1998); Theodore Eisenberg & Martin T. Wells, Ranking Law Journals and the Limits of Journal Citation Reports (33 Cornell Legal Studies Research, Working Paper No. 12-30, May 31, 2012), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2084169. 12 See, e.g., Ronen Perry, The Relative Value of American Law Reviews: A Critical Appraisal of Ranking Methods, 11 VA J. L. & TECH. 1 (2006); Ronen Perry, The Relative Value of American Law Reviews: Refinement and Implementation, 39 CONN. L. REV. 1 41 (2006).

58 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 I. DESCRIBING THE VARIABLES; MEDIAN LSAT, EMPLOYMENT OUTCOME, AND LAW REVIEW CITATIONS This Article responds to several criticisms of the U.S. News law school ings. First, there is the criticism that U.S. News uses too many variables, some of which are irrelevant or distracting. The second criticism is that U.S. News focuses insufficient attention on employment outcomes. The third criticism is that U.S. News focuses too much on the largely static peer assessments that may poorly reflect the current quality of schools. In response to these criticisms, this Article turns to three variables. The first is a measure of student quality: median LSAT score of first year students entering in the fall of 2013. This is taken from the data reported to the ABA and posted to its website. 13 This Article also uses a measure of the outcome for graduates: the employment data for the class that graduated in spring 2013 that was also reported to the ABA. 14 It uses the percentage of graduates employed at nine months in fulltime, permanent, JD-required jobs. 15 Finally, this Article uses citations to schools primary law reviews from 2006 to 2013, which is provided by John Doyle of Washington and Lee University School of Law s law library. 16 This Article looks at all 194 ABA-accredited law schools. The schools were ed from 1 to 194 on each of those three variables; then the s were averaged and the schools were reed on the new mean. There is, however, a special focus on the 147 schools that were ed by U.S. News in its March 2014 ings. 17 For those 147 schools this Article provide the difference between the new and the U.S. News. This Article, thus, compares the new ing with the 2015 U.S. News ing, which was released in spring 2014. Throughout this Article I refer to the U.S. News overall s as a benchmark to gauge the new ings developed here; this is because U.S. News is the leading current method for ing law schools and, therefore, I want to see how the new ings here compare to the benchmark that most people use. This is not meant as an endorsement of U.S. News; in fact, one of my hopes is that this Article will help develop an interest in alternative measures that are easy to 13 ABA-APPROVED LAW SCHOOL 1L ENTERING CLASS DATA: FALL 2013, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION (2013), available at http://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_education/ resources/statistics.html. 14 EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY 2013, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION (2013), available at http://employmentsummary.abaquestionnaire.org/. 15 In the initial iteration of this Article I used the percentage of a class employed at fulltime, permanent, JD-required jobs nine months after graduation. I included both solo practitioners and school-funded positions in this calculation. A number of people suggested excluding both of these groups. The exclusion of those two groups will be relatively unimportant to the ings, except for a few schools where the exclusion, particularly of school-funded positions, will be quite important. I discuss the changes below at Part 5 and at Tables 10 and 11. 16 Law Journals: Submissions and Ranking, 2007-2014, WASHINGTON AND LEE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW LAW LIBRARY, available at http://lawlib.wlu.edu/lj/ index.aspx. Northeastern University, whose law review began in 2009, was assigned a at the median of law reviews for the other 194 schools. See http://nulj.org/about. 17 There were another forty-seven schools that were listed by U.S. News as uned. While those schools are included in this Article, they are excluded from the analysis involving change from U.S. News to the new here.

2015] Ranking Law Schools 59 compute and respond to the needs of consumers of the ings. I have previously suggested that other factors be added to the U.S. News ing equation, including the percentage of African American students at each law school. 18 I continue to believe that measures including the diversity of students and faculty and other measures like faculty quality are important. However, this particular exploration of the possibility of a relatively simple ing focuses on more limited factors. II. LSAT AND EMPLOYMENT RANKINGS One simple way of ing looks to student quality and employment outcomes. Table 1 s schools based on the median LSAT of the class entering in 2013 and the percentage of the 2013 class employed at full-time, permanent, JD-required jobs nine months after graduation. The table averages those two s to create a new ing; a final column subtracts the new from the U.S. News overall. The LSAT and employment ings correlate closely with U.S. News overall (r=.91). 19 Table 2 lists the schools that improved the most in the LSAT and employment ings over their U.S. News ings. Those are institutions whose entering students and employment outcomes suggest they are substantially better than their U.S. News ings would indicate. For at least some of the largest outliers this seems to be due to strong job performance. For instance, the University of Montana s placement (36) is 78.5 places ahead of its U.S. News ; the University of New Hampshire s placement (35) is 61 places ahead; and South Texas placement (46) is 100.5 places ahead. Table 3, by contrast, lists the schools that declined the most in the LSAT and employment ings over their U.S. News ings. As with the schools that improved the most, when one looks at the schools that decline the most, employment seems to be the cause. For instance, the University of Connecticut s placement (163) is 107.5 places behind its U.S. News ; Pennsylvania State s placement (147) is 95 places behind; Hastings s placement (161) is 105.5 places behind; and American University s placement (151) is 76 places behind. These numbers suggest that prospective students should look very carefully at placement outcomes, because following the overall U.S. News ings by themselves may lead students far astray from what they ought to care about in some instances. III. THE LSAT, EMPLOYMENT, AND LAW REVIEW CITATION RANKINGS While some maintain that the two key factors are LSAT and employment, there is good reason to add some other measure to gauge reputation of an institution. U.S. News does this through their reputation scores, which collectively account for 40% of their ing. Because those numbers are proprietary, notoriously static, and perhaps subject to some gaming by schools, I have gone searching for another factor that might provide a measure of law school reputation and quality. I have previously written about the possibilities of using recent citations to schools main 18 Alfred L. Brophy, African American Student Enrollment and Law School Ranking, 27 ST. JOHN S J. C.R. & ECON. DEV. 15 (2013). 19 A correlation is a quantitative measure of the strength of a linear relationship between two variables.

60 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 law reviews as one measure. Citations to law schools main law reviews are highly correlated with U.S. News peer assessment scores, so they in some ways provide a freely available close proxy. But there are also independent reasons to suggest that recent citations may provide a good measure: They are citations to work being published recently and thus may reflect the intellectual orientation of the best students at a school. Moreover, because the journals that are perceived as better will likely have a better selection of articles, there is something of a feedback loop in operation, where the reviews that are perceived as best have the opportunity to publish what they believe to be the best work. There are reasons to be skeptical of these assumptions, of course. For one, we know that the journals associated with the most prestigious schools do not always publish the most cited work. 20 But for this preliminary study I have chosen to use citations as a third variable to help bring some other precision related to prestige and intellectual culture of the schools to the ing process, for citations reveal the success of the law school s academic project. Table 4 reports the of 194 law schools on median LSAT for the class entering in 2013; the percentage of the class of 2013 who had full-time, permanent, JD-required jobs nine months after graduation; and the number of citations to each school s main law review from 2006 to 2013. It also reports the mean of those three s for each school, the school s new based on that mean, the school s U.S. News ing in spring 2014, and the difference between the new and the U.S. News. The new and the U.S. News are highly correlated (r=.93). That is, the new ings are quite similar to the U.S. News ings. The correlations between each of the three variables and the overall U.S. News are also high, though the U.S. News and LSAT median are correlated most highly of the three (r=.93). The correlation between U.S. News and full-time, permanent, JDrequired jobs is.70 and the correlation between U.S. News and law review citations is.76. The correlations appear in Table 5. Although the overall correlation between the new ing and the U.S. News ing is high, there are some schools that have a notable difference between their new ing and the U.S. News ing. Table 6 lists those schools whose new improves by at least twenty places over the U.S. News ing. That is, the new ing suggests that the schools are substantially better than U.S. News would indicate. By contrast, Table 7 lists the schools whose new is significantly worse than their U.S. News ing. That is, the schools listed in Table 7 perform less well on the new than on U.S. News. Those schools have relatively poorer job placement, LSAT medians, and/or law review citations than their U.S. News would predict. IV. COMPARING THE NEW TWO- AND THREE-VARIABLE RANKINGS Given the controversy that surrounds the use of citations as a factor in ing, I want to compare the results of the two-variable ing (that takes equal measure of LSAT and employment) and the three-variable ing (that takes equal measure of LSAT, employment, and citations). As an initial matter, the absolute value of the average difference between the U.S. News and two-variable was 13.1, 20 See, e.g., Alfred L. Brophy, The Signaling Value of Law Reviews: An Exploration of Citations and Prestige, 36 FLA. ST. U. L. REV. 229 (2009).

2015] Ranking Law Schools 61 with a standard deviation of 12.1. That is larger than the absolute value of the average difference between the U.S. News and the three-variable, which was 11.8, with a standard deviation of 9.7. In other words, the three-variable s are closer on average to the U.S. News s than are the two-variable s. Perhaps this is not necessarily desirable; given the criticisms of U.S. News maybe we should not use it as a benchmark to judge new ing measures. However, the U.S. News s provide one popular measure of law schools it is useful to know that the three-variable measure is slightly closer to the U.S. News ing than the two-variable measure. Because the third variable that is added is citations, the schools whose law reviews perform well improve on the three-variable, while those with poor performing law reviews decline. Table 8 lists the schools that improve the most with the three-variable over the two-variable (LSAT and employment s only). Unsurprisingly, those are well established schools with highly regarded law reviews, such as the Connecticut Law Review, DePaul Law Review, American University Law Review, Hofstra Law Review, Hastings Law Review, Michigan State University Law Review, Cardozo Law Review, and University of Cincinnati Law Review. Table 9 lists the schools that declined the most with the three-variable over the two-variable. They are schools which are doing well in recruiting students and with placement, but for some reason have a law review that is not performing nearly as well. In some instances the schools are newer and thus their law reviews are not yet well established such as the Drexel Law Review, Florida International Law Review, and University of New Hampshire Law Review. We can expect that to change over time. In other instances, some reviews may have a focus on serving the regional bar and thus one would not expect them to have as many citations as other journals. 21 For those schools, the use of citations as a measure of school quality may be misplaced. V. RANKINGS EXCLUDING SCHOOL-FUNDED POSITIONS AND SOLO PRACTITIONERS The first part of this Article used s on employment as measured by the percentage of the graduating class of 2013 who obtained long-term, full-time positions requiring bar passage. This included graduates who had school-funded positions and also those who were solo practitioners. A number of people suggested that a better measure is to exclude those two groups of graduates. 22 Table 10 lists the schools with the most number of school-funded and solo positions and reports the percentage of their graduating class of 2013 who have such positions. While there are relatively few of these schools, some have a significant percentage 21 A quick review of some of the journals reveals that many include articles entirely appropriately on regional law. See, e.g., Alfred L. Brophy, The Tulsa Race Riot of 1921 in the Oklahoma Supreme Court, 54 OKLA. L. REV. 67 (2001); Kathleen R. Guzman, Where Strict Meets Substantial: Oklahoma Standards for the Execution of a Will, 66 OKLA. L. REV. 543 (2014); John T. Parry, Oklahoma s Save Our State Amendment: Two Issues for the Appeal, 64 OKLA. L. REV. 161 (2012). 22 See, e.g., JLK, Comment to Ranking Law Schools Based on LSAT, Employment Outcome, and Citations, THE FACULTY LOUNGE (June 19, 2014, 10:24 AM), http://www.thefacultylounge.org/2014/06/ing-law-schools-based-on-lsat-employmentoutcome-and-citations.html.

62 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 of their class employed in those positions. Thus, for most schools the employment does not change appreciably when the school-funded and solo practitioner positions are excluded, but for a few their on percentage of the class employed drops rather dramatically. Table 11 then reports the s of schools using the modified employment score (omitting school-funded positions and solo practitioners) and compares each school s on using the original and the modified employment scores. Thus, those interested in seeing the overall ing of all 194 schools on the three variable, where the employment excludes school-funded and solo positions, will want to use Table 11. Those who are interested in the three variable including the school-funded and solo positions will want to use Table 4. CONCLUSIONS There are several conclusions from this initial exploration. First, one can largely replicate the U.S. News ings with a small number of easily available data. While U.S. News has received extraordinary attention, their ings are quite similar to a simple compilation of a few key variables basic LSAT data, basic employment data, and basic citation data. However, and second, there are some schools that are rather significantly either under-ed or over-ed when we focus on several critical factors. That is, when we focus on student quality, employment outcome, and citations to a school s law review, without focusing on other factors, some schools appear to be significantly better (and in some cases significantly worse) than their U.S. News ing. This suggests that prospective students should look closely at the attributes of schools that matter to them, rather than just focusing on the overall U.S. News ing.

2015] Ranking Law Schools 63 APPENDIX Table 1 Law Schools Ranked by Mean Ranks of LSAT and Employment School LSAT Employ Mean New USN USN - New Columbia 3.5 2 2.75 1 4.5 3.5 NYU 5.5 3 4.25 2 6 4 Virginia 8 1 4.5 3 8 5 Chicago 5.5 4 4.75 4.5 4.5 0 Harvard 1.5 8 4.75 4.5 2-2.5 Stanford 3.5 7 5.25 6 3-3 Pennsylvania 8 5 6.5 7 7 0 Yale 1.5 16 8.75 8 1-7 Duke 8 11 9.5 9 10.5 1.5 Cornell 14.5 6 10.25 10 13.5 3.5 UC- Berkeley 14.5 9 11.75 11 9-2 Georgetown 11 13 12 12 13.5 1.5 Vanderbilt 14.5 10 12.25 13 16.5 3.5 Michigan 11 14 12.5 14 10.5-3.5 Northwestern 11 15 13 15 12-3 Emory 21 12 16.5 16 19 3 Texas 18 17 17.5 17 15-2 UCLA 14.5 21 17.75 18 16.5-1.5 G. Washington 21 18 19.5 19 21 2 William & Mary 25.5 20 22.75 20 24.5 4.5 Alabama 25.5 27 26.25 21 23 2 Notre Dame 30 26 28 22 26 4 Minnesota 25.5 31 28.25 23 21-2 Iowa 41 19 30 24 27.5 3.5 Wash. Univ. 18 43 30.5 25 18-7 SMU 34.5 29 31.75 26 42 16 UC- Davis 34.5 30 32.25 27 37.5 10.5 Boston Univ. 21 44 32.5 28 27.5-0.5 Wash.- Seattle 25.5 41 33.25 29 24.5-4.5 Colorado 34.5 33 33.75 30 43.5 13.5 Georgia 30 39 34.5 31 29.5-1.5 Illinois 49.5 24 36.75 32 40.5 8.5 North Carolina 41 34 37.5 33.5 33-0.5 USC 18 57 37.5 33.5 21-12.5 Baylor 49.5 28 38.75 35 52 17 Boston College 25.5 60 42.75 36 37.5 1.5 Ind.- Bloomington 34.5 54 44.25 37 29.5-7.5 Florida State 59 32 45.5 38 45 7 Fordham 30 65 47.5 39 37.5-1.5 Florida 49.5 49 49.25 40 49.5 9.5 BYU 41 58 49.5 41 37.5-3.5 Houston 49.5 55 52.25 42.5 59 16.5 Kentucky 82.5 22 52.25 42.5 59 16.5 Arizona State 34.5 77 55.75 44 33-11

64 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 1 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT and Employment School LSAT Employ Mean New USN USN - New New Hampshire 82.5 35 58.75 45 96 51 Seton Hall 82.5 37 59.75 46 69.5 23.5 Utah 59 64 61.5 47 49.5 2.5 Ohio State 49.5 76 62.75 48 33-15 Wisconsin 41 85 63 49 33-16 Washington & Lee 25.5 101 63.25 50 43.5-6.5 Georgia State 59 69 64 51 65.5 14.5 Wake Forest 34.5 96 65.25 52 33-19 Nevada 69.5 63 66.25 53.5 84.5 31 Oklahoma 82.5 50 66.25 53.5 59 5.5 LSU 92.5 42 67.25 55 75 20 Rutgers- Camden 69.5 66 67.75 56.5 81.5 25 Tennessee 82.5 53 67.75 56.5 75 18.5 New Mexico 113.5 23 68.25 58 75 17 Temple 49.5 89 69.25 59 62 3 Richmond 41 98 69.5 60.5 52-8.5 South Carolina 101 38 69.5 60.5 96 35.5 Nebraska 92.5 51 71.75 62 55.5-6.5 Arizona 49.5 95 72.25 63 40.5-22.5 Case Western 59 87 73 64 65.5 1.5 Montana 113.5 36 74.75 65 124.5 59.5 Kansas 92.5 59 75.75 66 69.5 3.5 Arkansas- Fayetteville 113.5 40 76.75 67 62-5 Louisville 101 56 78.5 68 89.5 21.5 Miami 82.5 78 80.25 69 62-7 Brooklyn 59 102 80.5 70 84.5 14.5 Missouri- Columbia 82.5 80 81.25 71 65.5-5.5 Cardozo 49.5 114 81.75 72 65.5-6.5 Mississippi 101 67 84 73 105 32 Lewis & Clark 69.5 100 84.75 74 75 1 Pepperdine 49.5 122 85.75 75 55.5-19.5 Chicago- Kent 69.5 103 86.25 76 75-1 George Mason 41 132 86.5 77 47-30 Florida International 92.5 81 86.75 78 101.5 23.5 Denver 69.5 105 87.25 79.5 69.5-10 Gonzaga 113.5 61 87.25 79.5 109.5 30 Tulane 49.5 126 87.75 81 47-34 Pittsburgh 69.5 107 88.25 82 81.5-0.5 San Diego 59 121 90 83 79.5-3.5 Cincinnati 69.5 113 91.25 84 79.5-4.5 Southern Illinois 158.5 25 91.75 85 Maryland 59 125 92 86 47-39 SUNY- Buffalo 113.5 71 92.25 87 101.5 14.5 Stetson 113.5 72 92.75 88 96 8

2015] Ranking Law Schools 65 Table 1 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT and Employment School LSAT Employ Mean New USN USN - New Mercer 135.5 52 93.75 89 105 16 Rutgers- Newark 82.5 106 94.25 90 84.5-5.5 Tulsa 101 88 94.5 91 75-16 Northeastern 41 150 95.5 92 96 4 Loyola- Los Angeles 59 133 96 93 89.5-3.5 Texas Tech 101 92 96.5 95 109.5 14.5 Washburn 125 68 96.5 95 116 21 Wyoming 148 45 96.5 95 131.5 36.5 South Texas 148 46 97 97 146.5 49.5 St. John's 92.5 104 98.25 98 109.5 11.5 Hawaii 82.5 116.5 99.5 99 101.5 2.5 Villanova 82.5 118 100.25 100 96-4 Wayne State 82.5 119 100.75 101 89.5-11.5 Loyola- Chicago 69.5 134 101.75 102 69.5-32.5 Memphis 125 79 102 103 142 39 Oregon 69.5 135 102.25 104 101.5-2.5 Idaho 135.5 70 102.75 105.5 119 13.5 Ohio Northern 158.5 47 102.75 105.5 William Mitchell 113.5 93 103.25 107 137 30 Albany 125 82 103.5 108 119 11 St. Louis 101 109 105 109 96-13 Drake 125 86 105.5 110 113.5 3.5 Syracuse 101 111 106 111 109.5-1.5 Marquette 101 115 108 112 96-16 Oklahoma City 168.5 48 108.25 113.5 Penn State 69.5 147 108.25 113.5 52-61.5 UC- Hastings 59 161 110 115 55.5-59.5 Regent 125 97 111 116.5 St. Mary's 148 74 111 116.5 Willamette 148 75 111.5 118 124.5 6.5 West Virginia 125 99 112 119 84.5-34.5 Connecticut 69.5 163 116.25 120 55.5-64.5 American 82.5 151 116.75 121 75-46 Dayton 176.5 62 119.25 122.5 Drexel 101 137.5 119.25 122.5 131.5 9 Santa Clara 82.5 158 120.25 124 109.5-14.5 Indiana- Indianapolis 113.5 128 120.75 125 89.5-35.5 Samford 158.5 84 121.25 126 137 11 Campbell 135.5 108 121.75 127.5 124.5-3 Chapman 69.5 174 121.75 127.5 142 14.5 Creighton 135.5 110 122.75 129 116-13 Nova Southeastern 168.5 83 125.75 130.5 Seattle 92.5 159 125.75 130.5 89.5-41 South Dakota 180 73 126.5 132 145 13

66 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 1 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT and Employment School LSAT Employ Mean New USN USN New Akron 125 129 127 133.5 124.5-9 St. Thomas- Minnesota 101 153 127 133.5 131.5-2 Hofstra 113.5 141 127.25 135 137 2 CUNY 113.5 142 127.75 136.5 113.5-23 Michigan State 82.5 173 127.75 136.5 89.5-47 Duquesne 135.5 124 129.75 138 124.5-13.5 Vermont 148 112 130 139 131.5-7.5 Catholic 113.5 148 130.75 140 109.5-30.5 DePaul 113.5 149 131.25 141.5 124.5-17 Mississippi College 168.5 94 131.25 141.5 Maine 101 162 131.5 143 131.5-11.5 North Dakota 176.5 90 133.25 144 131.5-12.5 Toledo 135.5 137.5 136.5 145 142-3 Faulkner 183.5 91 137.25 146 Northern Illinois 158.5 116.5 137.5 147 Loyola- New Orleans 148 130 139 148 Charleston 158.5 120 139.25 149.5 Missouri- Kansas City 135.5 143 139.25 149.5 105-44.5 Arkansas- Little Rock 148 131 139.5 151.5 124.5-27 Hamline 125 154 139.5 151.5 124.5-27 Cleveland State 135.5 145.5 140.5 153 116-37 Howard 148 137.5 142.75 154 137-17 Baltimore 135.5 156 145.75 155 137-18 McGeorge 113.5 179 146.25 156 146.5-9.5 John Marshall- Chicago 168.5 127 147.75 157.5 Texas A&M 135.5 160 147.75 157.5 Quinnipiac 113.5 185 149.25 159 119-40 Touro 176.5 123 149.75 160 Southwestern 135.5 167 151.25 161 New York Law School 148 155 151.5 162 142-20 San Francisco 125 180 152.5 163 Northern Kentucky 135.5 171 153.25 164 Widener 168.5 140 154.25 165 Pace 148 165 156.5 166 142-24 St. Thomas- Florida 180 144 162 167 Appalachian 187 137.5 162.25 168 Liberty 148 181 164.5 169 California Western 148 182 165 170 Detroit Mercy 148 183 165.5 171 Roger Williams 168.5 164 166.25 172 Capital 176.5 157 166.75 173.5 Western State 158.5 175 166.75 173.5 New England 168.5 166 167.25 175 Texas Southern 191 145.5 168.25 176

2015] Ranking Law Schools 67 Table 1 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT and Employment School LSAT Employ Mean New John Marshall- 168.5 169 168.75 177 Atlanta Arizona Summit 191 152 171.5 178 Elon 158.5 186 172.25 179.5 Suffolk 168.5 176 172.25 179.5 Western New 168.5 178 173.25 181 England Barry 180 168 174 182 Golden Gate 158.5 193 175.75 183 Florida A&M 183.5 172 177.75 184 Whittier 168.5 191 179.75 185 District of Columbia 168.5 192 180.25 186 Valparaiso 194 170 182 187 Ave Maria 183.5 184 183.75 188 Charlotte 191 177 184 189 Thomas Jefferson 183.5 188 185.75 190 Thomas M. Cooley 187 190 188.5 191 Florida Coastal 191 187 189 192 Southern University 191 189 190 193 North Carolina Central 187 194 190.5 194 USN USN New

68 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 2 Schools with Largest Improvement in the LSAT and Employment Rankings over U.S. News Ranking School Improvement in Rank Montana 59.5 New Hampshire 51 South Texas 49.5 Memphis 39 Wyoming 36.5 South Carolina 35.5 Nevada 31 William Mitchell 30 Mississippi 32 Gonzaga 30 Rutgers- Camden 25 Florida International 23.5 Seton Hall 23.5 Louisville 21.5 Washburn 21 Louisiana State University 20

2015] Ranking Law Schools 69 Table 3 Schools with Largest Decline in the LSAT and Employment Rankings over U.S. News Ranking (twenty s or more) School Connecticut Penn State UC- Hastings Michigan State American Missouri- Kansas City Seattle Quinnipiac Maryland Cleveland State Indiana- Indianapolis West Virginia Tulane Loyola- Chicago George Mason Catholic Arkansas Little Rock Hamline Pace Arizona New York Law School Change in Rank - 64.5-61.5-59.5-47 - 46-44.5-41 - 40-39 - 37-35.5-34.5-34 - 32.5-30 - 30.5-27 - 27-24 - 22.5-20

70 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 4 Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT, Employment, and Citations Rankings School LSAT Employ Cites Mean New USN Difference USN - New Columbia 3.5 2 3 2.83 1 4.5 3.5 Harvard 1.5 8 1 3.5 2 2 0 Stanford 3.5 7 4 4.83 3 3 0 Yale 1.5 16 2 6.5 4 1-3 Virginia 8 1 11 6.67 5 8 3 Pennsylvania 8 5 8 7 6 7 1 NYU 5.5 3 14 7.5 7 6-1 Georgetown 11 13 7 10.33 8.5 13.5 5 Michigan 11 14 6 10.33 8.5 10.5 2 Chicago 5.5 4 23 10.83 10.5 4.5-6 UC- Berkeley 14.5 9 9 10.83 10.5 9-1.5 Cornell 14.5 6 18 12.83 12 13.5 1.5 Duke 8 11 21 13.33 13 10.5-2.5 Northwestern 11 15 15 13.67 14 12-2 Vanderbilt 14.5 10 20 14.83 15 16.5 1.5 UCLA 14.5 21 10 15.17 16 16.5 0.5 Texas 18 17 12 15.67 17 15-2 Emory 21 12 33 22 18 19 1 William & 25.5 20 22 22.5 19 24.5 5.5 Mary George 21 18 29 22.67 20 21 1 Washington Minnesota 25.5 31 13 23.17 21 21 0 Notre Dame 30 26 16 24 22 26 4 Iowa 41 19 17 25.67 23 27.5 4.5 Boston 21 44 24 29.67 24 27.5 3.5 University UC- Davis 34.5 30 28 30.83 25 37.5 12.5 Washington 18 43 38 33 26 18-8 Univ. Alabama 25.5 27 47 33.17 27.5 23-4.5 Illinois 49.5 24 26 33.17 27.5 40.5 13 Fordham 30 65 5 33.33 29.5 37.5 8 North 41 34 25 33.33 29.5 33 3.5 Carolina USC 18 57 36 37 31 21-10

2015] Ranking Law Schools 71 Table 4 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT, Employment, and Citations Rankings School LSAT Employ Cites Mean New USN Difference USN - New Washington- 25.5 41 46 37.5 32 24.5-7.5 Seattle Boston 25.5 60 30 38.5 33.5 37.5 4 College Indiana- 34.5 54 27 38.5 33.5 29.5-4 Bloomington Colorado 34.5 33 50 39.17 35 43.5 8.5 SMU 34.5 29 57 40.17 36 42 6 Georgia 30 39 56 41.67 37 29.5-7.5 Florida 49.5 49 34 44.17 38 49.5 11.5 Florida State 59 32 58 49.67 39 45 6 BYU 41 58 53 50.67 40 37.5-2.5 Houston 49.5 55 48 50.83 41 59 18 Wisconsin 41 85 35 53.67 42 33-9 Ohio State 49.5 76 43 56.17 43.5 33-10.5 Washington 25.5 101 42 56.17 43.5 43.5 0 & Lee Wake Forest 34.5 96 41 57.17 45 33-12 Arizona State 34.5 77 66 59.17 46 33-13 Arizona 49.5 95 37 60.5 47 40.5-6.5 Cardozo 49.5 114 19 60.83 48 65.5 17.5 Utah 59 64 62.5 61.83 49 49.5 0.5 Seton Hall 82.5 37 78 65.83 50 69.5 19.5 Baylor 49.5 28 124 67.17 51 52 1 Nevada 69.5 63 72 68.17 52 84.5 32.5 Richmond 41 98 67 68.67 53 52-1 Lewis & Clark 69.5 100 40 69.83 54 75 21 South 101 38 73 70.67 55 96 41 Carolina Kentucky 82.5 22 113 72.5 56 59 3 Tennessee 82.5 53 84 73.17 57.5 75 17.5 Tulane 49.5 126 44 73.17 57.5 47-10.5 Missouri- 82.5 80 59 73.83 59 65.5 6.5 Columbia Brooklyn 59 102 62.5 74.5 60.5 84.5 24 Temple 49.5 89 85 74.5 60.5 62 1.5 Cincinnati 69.5 113 45 75.83 62 79.5 17.5

72 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 4 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT, Employment, and Citations Rankings School LSAT Employ Cites Mean New USN Difference USN - New George 41 132 55 76 63 47-16 Mason Nebraska 92.5 51 86 76.5 64 55.5-8.5 Pepperdine 49.5 122 61 77.5 65 55.5-9.5 Kansas 92.5 59 82.5 78 66 69.5 3.5 LSU 92.5 42 101 78.5 67.5 75 7.5 Miami 82.5 78 75 78.5 67.5 62-5.5 Chicago- Kent 69.5 103 65 79.17 69 75 6 Case Western 59 87 92 79.33 70.5 65.5-5 Maryland 59 125 54 79.33 70.5 47-23.5 Georgia State 59 69 115 81 72 65.5-6.5 Denver 69.5 105 69 81.17 73 69.5-3.5 Rutgers- 69.5 66 109 81.5 74.5 81.5 7 Camden SUNY- Buffalo 113.5 71 60 81.5 74.5 101.5 27 UC- Hastings 59 161 32 84 76 55.5-20.5 Loyola- Los 59 133 64 85.33 77.5 89.5 12 Angeles San Diego 59 121 76 85.33 77.5 79.5 2 Connecticut 69.5 163 31 87.83 79 55.5-23.5 Oklahoma 82.5 50 136 89.5 80 59-21 American 82.5 151 39 90.83 81 75-6 Mississippi 101 67 106 91.33 82 105 23 Albany 125 82 70 92.33 83 119 36 Louisville 101 56 122 93 84 89.5 5.5 Arkansas- 113.5 40 126 93.17 85 62-23 Fayetteville St. Louis 101 109 71 93.67 86 96 10 New Mexico 113.5 23 145 93.83 87 75-12 New 82.5 35 169 95.5 88.5 96 7.5 Hampshire William 113.5 93 80 95.5 88.5 137 48.5 Mitchell Rutgers- 82.5 106 99 95.83 90 84.5-5.5 Newark Northeastern 41 150 97.5 96.17 91.5 96 4.5 Villanova 82.5 118 88 96.17 91.5 96 4.5

2015] Ranking Law Schools 73 Table 4 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT, Employment, and Citations Rankings School LSAT Employ Cites Mean New USN Difference USN - New Washburn 125 68 96 96.33 93 116 23 St. John's 92.5 104 93 96.5 94 109.5 15.5 Loyola- 69.5 134 90 97.83 95.5 69.5-26 Chicago Penn State 69.5 147 77 97.83 95.5 52-43.5 Pittsburgh 69.5 107 120 98.83 97 81.5-15.5 Oregon 69.5 135 94.5 99.67 98 101.5 3.5 Mercer 135.5 52 117 101.5 99 105 6 Marquette 101 115 89 101.67 100 96-4 Hofstra 113.5 141 51 101.83 101 137 36 Texas Tech 101 92 114 102.33 102 109.5 7.5 Michigan 82.5 173 52 102.5 103 89.5-13.5 State Tulsa 101 88 119 102.67 104 75-29 DePaul 113.5 149 49 103.83 105.5 124.5 19 Gonzaga 113.5 61 137 103.83 105.5 109.5 4 Drake 125 86 104 105 107 113.5 6.5 Santa Clara 82.5 158 79 106.5 108 109.5 1.5 Montana 113.5 36 171 106.83 109 124.5 15.5 Southern 158.5 25 138 107.17 110 Illinois Akron 125 129 68 107.33 111 124.5 13.5 South Texas 148 46 128.5 107.5 112 146.5 34.5 Seattle 92.5 159 74 108.5 113 89.5-23.5 Ohio 158.5 47 121 108.83 114.5 Northern Stetson 113.5 72 141 108.83 114.5 96-18.5 Syracuse 101 111 116 109.33 116 109.5-6.5 Indiana- 113.5 128 91 110.83 117.5 89.5-28 Indianapolis Wayne State 82.5 119 131 110.83 117.5 89.5-28 West Virginia 125 99 111 111.67 119 84.5-34.5 Memphis 125 79 132 112 120 142 22 Catholic 113.5 148 82.5 114.67 121 109.5-11.5 Idaho 135.5 70 142 115.83 122 119-3 Wyoming 148 45 155 116 123 131.5 8.5 Willamette 148 75 128.5 117.17 124 124.5 0.5

74 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 4 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT, Employment, and Citations Rankings School LSAT Employ Cites Mean New USN Difference USN - New Florida 92.5 81 184 119.17 125 101.5-23.5 International Vermont 148 112 103 121 126 131.5 5.5 Creighton 135.5 110 118 121.17 127 116-11 Missouri- 135.5 143 87 121.83 128 105-23 Kansas City St. Mary's 148 74 151 124.33 129 Hawaii 82.5 116.5 175 124.67 130 101.5-28.5 Toledo 135.5 137.5 102 125 131 142 11 Chapman 69.5 174 139 127.5 132 142 10 Regent 125 97 161 127.67 133 New York Law 148 155 81 128 134 142 8 School St. Thomas- 101 153 133 129 135 131.5-3.5 Minnesota Cleveland 135.5 145.5 108 129.67 136 116-20 State Oklahoma City 168.5 48 173 129.83 137 Maine 101 162 127 130 138 131.5-6.5 Howard 148 137.5 105 130.17 139 137-2 Campbell 135.5 108 156 133.17 141 124.5-16.5 McGeorge 113.5 179 107 133.17 141 146.5 5.5 San Francisco 125 180 94.5 133.17 141 Dayton 176.5 62 162 133.5 143 North Dakota 176.5 90 134.5 133.67 144 131.5-12.5 South Dakota 180 73 149 134 145 145 0 John Marshall- 168.5 127 110 135.17 146 Chicago Duquesne 135.5 124 147 135.5 147 124.5-22.5 Samford 158.5 84 165 135.83 148 137-11 Drexel 101 137.5 178 138.83 149 131.5-17.5 Loyola- New 148 130 140 139.33 150 Orleans Nova 168.5 83 167 139.5 151 Southeastern Hamline 125 154 146 141.67 152.5 124.5-28 Pace 148 165 112 141.67 152.5 142-10.5

2015] Ranking Law Schools 75 Table 4 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT, Employment, and Citations Rankings School LSAT Employ Cites Mean New Southwestern 135.5 167 125 142.5 154 USN Difference USN - New Quinnipiac 113.5 185 130 142.83 155 119-36 Mississippi 168.5 94 168 143.5 156 College CUNY 113.5 142 180 145.17 157 113.5-43.5 Charleston 158.5 120 159 145.83 158 Baltimore 135.5 156 150 147.17 159 137-22 Arkansas- 148 131 163 147.33 160.5 124.5-36 Little Rock Suffolk 168.5 176 97.5 147.33 160.5 Touro 176.5 123 148 149.17 162 Northern 158.5 116.5 174 149.67 163 Illinois New England 168.5 166 123 152.5 164 Northern 135.5 171 152 152.83 165 Kentucky Valparaiso 194 170 100 154.67 166 Faulkner 183.5 91 191 155.17 167.5 Texas A&M 135.5 160 170 155.17 167.5 Capital 176.5 157 134.5 156 169 California 148 182 144 158 170 Western Widener 168.5 140 166 158.17 171 St. Thomas- 180 144 157 160.33 172 Florida Detroit Mercy 148 183 154 161.67 173 Roger 168.5 164 153 161.83 174 Williams Western New 168.5 178 143 163.17 175 England Appalachian 187 137.5 179 167.83 176 Golden Gate 158.5 193 160 170.5 177 Liberty 148 181 188 172.33 178 Texas 191 145.5 181 172.5 179.5 Southern Whittier 168.5 191 158 172.5 179.5 Western State 158.5 175 185 172.83 181 Barry 180 168 172 173.33 182

76 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 4 continued Law Schools Ranked by Mean of LSAT, Employment, and Citations Rankings School John Marshall- Atlanta Arizona Summit LSAT Employ Cites Mean New 168.5 169 190 175.83 183 191 152 187 176.67 184 Ave Maria 183.5 184 164 177.17 185 Elon 158.5 186 194 179.5 186 Florida A&M 183.5 172 193 182.83 187.5 Thomas 183.5 188 177 182.83 187.5 Jefferson District of 168.5 192 189 183.17 189 Columbia Florida 191 187 176 184.67 190 Coastal Charlotte 191 177 192 186.67 191.5 Thomas M. Cooley Southern University North Carolina Central 187 190 183 186.67 191.5 191 189 182 187.33 193 187 194 186 189 194 USN Difference USN - New Table 5 Correlations between U.S. News Rank, New Rank, LSAT median, Employed at Nine Months, and Citations to Main Law Reviews USN New LSAT Emp Emp Cites FTLT adjust USN 1.00.93 -.91 -.70 -.68. 79 New.93 1.00 -.89 -.77 -.74.86 LSAT -.91 -.89 1.00.68.65 -.79 Emp FTLT -.70 -.77.68 1.00.96 -.48 Emp adjust -.68 -.74. 65.96 1.00 -.45 Cites. 79. 86 -.79 -.48 -.45 1.00 N = 147 (47 rows not used due to missing values)

2015] Ranking Law Schools 77 Table 6 Schools with Largest Improvement in the New Rankings (twenty or more places) William Mitchell 48.5 South Carolina 41 Hofstra 36 South Texas 34.5 Albany 36 Nevada 32.5 SUNY- Buffalo 27 Brooklyn 24 Mississippi 23 Washburn 23 Memphis 22 Lewis & Clark 21 Table 7 Schools with the Largest Decline in the New Rankings (twenty or more places) Penn State CUNY Arkansas- Little Rock Quinnipiac West Virginia Tulsa Indiana- Indianapolis Wayne State Loyola- Chicago Hawaii Hamline Seattle Connecticut Arkansas- Fayetteville Missouri- Kansas City Duquesne Baltimore Oklahoma Cleveland State - 43.5-43.5-36 - 36-34.5-29 - 28-28 - 26-28.5-28 - 23.5-23.5-23 - 23-22.5-22 - 21-20

78 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 8 Schools with Greatest Improvement in Three-Variable Rankings Over Two-Variable Rankings (improvement in of fifteen or more places) School Rank 2 var Rank 3 var Difference Connecticut 116.25 87.83 28.42 DePaul 131.25 103.83 27.42 Valparaiso 182 154.67 27.33 UC- Hastings 110 84 26 American 116.75 90.83 25.92 Hofstra 127.25 101.83 25.42 Michigan State 127.75 102.5 25.25 Suffolk 172.25 147.33 24.92 New York Law School 151.5 128 23.5 Cardozo 81.75 60.83 20.92 Akron 127 107.33 19.67 San Francisco 152.5 133.17 19.33 Missouri- Kansas City 139.25 121.83 17.42 Seattle 125.75 108.5 17.25 Catholic 130.75 114.67 16.08 Cincinnati 91.25 75.83 15.42 Difference between s based on two variables (LSAT median and employment) and s based on three variables (LSAT median, employment, and citations).

2015] Ranking Law Schools 79 Table 9 Schools with Largest Decline in Three-Variable Rankings Over Two-Variable Rankings (decline in 15 or more places) School Rank 2 var Rank 3 var Difference New Hampshire 58.75 95.5-36.75 Florida International 86.75 119.17-32.42 Montana 74.75 106.83-32.08 Baylor 38.75 67.17-28.42 New Mexico 68.25 93.83-25.58 Hawaii 99.5 124.67-25.17 Oklahoma 66.25 89.5-23.25 Oklahoma City 108.25 129.83-21.58 Kentucky 52.25 72.5-20.25 Drexel 119.25 138.83-19.58 Wyoming 96.5 116-19.5 Faulkner 137.25 155.17-17.92 CUNY 127.75 145.17-17.42 Georgia State 64 81-17 Regent 111 127.67-16.67 Gonzaga 87.25 103.83-16.58 Arkansas- Fayetteville 76.75 93.17-16.42 Stetson 92.75 108.83-16.08 Southern Illinois 91.75 107.17-15.42

80 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 10 Schools with Largest Percentages of School-Funded and Solo Practitioners, Class of 2013 School Emp FTLT Modified Emp Effect of correction Emory 84.2 62.3 21.9 William & Mary 76.5 55.8 20.7 Virginia 95.6 79.7 15.9 GWU 77.8 62.9 14.9 Texas Southern 47.8 33.3 14.5 Lewis & Clark 57.6 45.2 12.4 Georgetown 83.7 72.4 11.3 Faulkner 59.4 48.5 10.9 Oklahoma City 66.5 55.9 10.6 St. Mary's 61.9 51.7 10.1 UCLA 75.9 66.3 9.6 Cornell 89.6 80.3 9.3 Charlotte 36.9 27.7 9.1 Illinois 72.7 63.6 9.1 Vanderbilt 86.4 77.7 8.7 American 45.6 36.9 8.7 Berkeley 86.7 78.1 8.6 Liberty 35.5 26.9 8.6 New York 94 85.8 8.2 Appalachian 50 42 8 Emp FLTL = percentage of class of 2013 employed in full-time, long-term JDrequired jobs. Modified Emp = percentage of class of 2013 employed in full-time, long-term JDrequired jobs (excluding those in school-funded positions and solo practitioners). This Table lists schools with a difference of 8% or more between the two measures of employment.

2015] Ranking Law Schools 81 Table 11 Schools Ranked According to LSAT, Modified Employment, and Citations, Compared to Rank on LSAT, Employment, and Citations Difference between s based on three variables (LSAT median, employment, and citations), where qualifying employment is (A) all full-time, long-term employment or (B) full-time long-term employment that is not school-funded or solo practice. Schools are listed in order of according to criterion B. School A B Difference Columbia 1 1 0 Harvard 2 2 0 Stanford 3 3 0 Yale 4 4 0 Pennsylvania 6 5 1 NYU 7 6 1 Michigan 8.5 7 1.5 Virginia 5 8-3 Chicago 10.5 9 1.5 Duke 13 10 3 UC- Berkeley 10.5 11-0.5 Georgetown 8.5 12-3.5 Northwestern 14 13 1 Cornell 12 14-2 Texas 17 15 2 Vanderbilt 15 16-1 UCLA 16 17-1 Notre Dame 22 18 4 Minnesota 21 19 2 Iowa 23 20 3 Fordham 29.5 21 8.5 Washington Univ. 26 22 4 North Carolina 29.5 23 6.5 Alabama 27.5 24 3.5 George Washington 20 25-5 Boston College 33.5 26 7.5 Boston University 24 27-3 Emory 18 28-10 UC- Davis 25 29-4 Washington- Seattle 32 30 2 Georgia 37 31 6 SMU 36 32 4

82 INDIANA LAW JOURNAL SUPPLEMENT [Vol. 91:55 Table 11 continued Schools Ranked According to LSAT, Modified Employment, and Citations, Compared to Rank on LSAT, Employment, and Citations School A B Difference Indiana- Bloomington 33.5 33 0.5 USC 31 34-3 Colorado 35 35 0 Illinois 27.5 36-8.5 Florida 38 37 1 William & Mary 19 38-19 BYU 40 39 1 Florida State 39 40-1 Houston 41 41 0 Washington & Lee 43.5 42 1.5 Wisconsin 42 43-1 Wake Forest 45 44 1 Arizona 47 45 2 Cardozo 48 46 2 Arizona State 46 47.5-1.5 Ohio State 43.5 47.5-4 Utah 49 49 0 Seton Hall 50 50 0 Nevada 52 51 1 Richmond 53 52 1 South Carolina 55 53 2 Tulane 57.5 54 3.5 Baylor 51 55-4 Temple 60.5 56 4.5 Brooklyn 60.5 57 3.5 Kentucky 56 58-2 Nebraska 64 59 5 Missouri- Columbia 59 60-1 Cincinnati 62 61.5 0.5 Miami 67.5 61.5 6 Pepperdine 65 63 2 Case Western 70.5 64 6.5 George Mason 63 65-2 Rutgers- Camden 74.5 66 8.5 LSU 67.5 67 0.5 SUNY- Buffalo 74.5 68 6.5 Chicago- Kent 69 69 0 Kansas 66 70-4 Georgia State 72 71 1 Denver 73 72 1

2015] Ranking Law Schools 83 Table 11 continued Schools Ranked According to LSAT, Modified Employment, and Citations, Compared to Rank on LSAT, Employment, and Citations School A B Difference Tennessee 57.5 73-15.5 Maryland 70.5 74-3.5 Loyola- Los Angeles 77.5 75 2.5 UC- Hastings 76 76 0 Lewis & Clark 54 77-23 San Diego 77.5 78-0.5 Connecticut 79 79 0 Oklahoma 80 80 0 Albany 83 81 2 Arkansas- Fayetteville 85 82 3 New Mexico 87 83 4 St. John's 94 84 10 Louisville 84 85-1 Villanova 91.5 86 5.5 William Mitchell 88.5 87 1.5 New Hampshire 88.5 88 0.5 Mississippi 82 89-7 Northeastern 91.5 90 1.5 Rutgers- Newark 90 91-1 Washburn 93 92 1 American 81 93-12 Mercer 99 94 5 Loyola- Chicago 95.5 95.5 0 Penn State 95.5 95.5 0 St. Louis 86 97-11 Pittsburgh 97 98-1 Michigan State 103 99 4 Oregon 98 100-2 Hofstra 101 101 0 DePaul 105.5 102 3.5 Marquette 100 103.5-3.5 Texas Tech 102 103.5-1.5 Montana 109 105 4 Gonzaga 105.5 106.5-1 Stetson 114.5 106.5 8 Tulsa 104 108-4 Santa Clara 108 109-1 Syracuse 116 110 6 Southern Illinois 110 111-1 West Virginia 119 112 7